|
|
|
|
|
| The zoo must kill the bear.
Posted: 3/21/2007 11:51:12 AM | BERLIN — The Berlin Zoo's abandoned polar bear cub Knut looks cute, cuddly and has become a front-page media darling, but an animal-rights activist insisted Monday he would have been better off dead than raised by humans.
"Feeding by hand is not species-appropriate but a gross violation of animal-protection laws," animal-rights activist Frank Albrecht was quoted as saying by the mass-circulation Bild daily, which has featured regular photo spreads tracking fuzzy Knut's frolicking.
"The zoo must kill the bear."
• Click here for the Berlin Zoo's Web site.
When Knut — or "Cute Knut," as the 19-pound bear has become known — was born last December, his mother ignored him and his brother. Knut's brother later died and zoo officials intervened, choosing to raise the cub themselves.
Albrecht's assertion prompted quick condemnations from the zoo, politicians and other animal-rights groups.
"The killing of an animal has nothing to do with animal protection," said Wolfgang Apel, head of the German Federation for the Protection of Animals.
• Click here to visit FOXNews.com's Natural Science Center.
Greens politician Undine Kurth called the suggestion "fully unacceptable." Petra Pau of the opposition Left Party invoked the widely-reported case of an Italian bear dubbed "Bruno" who wandered last year into southern Germany, only to be killed by hunters at the behest of local authorities worried about residents and livestock.
"Berlin is not Bavaria — therefore it will be better for Knut than Bruno," Pau said.
Albrecht told The Associated Press his beliefs were more nuanced than reported by Bild, though he applauded the debate the article had started.
He explained that though he thought it was wrong of the zoo to have saved the cub's life, now that the bear can live on his own, it would be equally wrong to kill him.
"If a polar bear mother rejected the baby, then I believe the zoo must follow the instincts of nature," Albrecht said. "In the wild, it would have been left to die."
The German animal rights organization "Four Paws" argued along similar lines, saying it would not be right to punish the cub for a bad decision made by the zoo.
Other activists have also argued that current treatment of the cub is inhumane and could lead to future difficulties interacting with fellow polar bears.
"They cannot domesticate a wild animal," Ruediger Schmiedel, head of the Foundation for Bears, told Der Spiegel weekly in its Monday edition.
Albrecht cited a similar case of a baby sloth bear that was abandoned by its mother last December in the Leipzig city zoo and killed by lethal injection, rather than being kept alive by humans.
But Knut belongs to the Berlin Zoo, and their veterinarian Andre Schuele, charged with caring for him, disagrees.
"These criticisms make me angry, but you can't take them so seriously," Andre Schuele said. "Polar bears live alone in the wild; I see no logical reason why this bear should be killed."
Schuele also argued that given the increased rarity of polar bears in the wild, it makes sense to keep them alive in captivity so that they can be bred.
"Polar bears are under threat of extinction, and if we feed the bear with a bottle, it has a good chance of growing up and perhaps becoming attractive as a stud for other zoos," Schuele said.
Knut, who recently posed for a photo shoot with star-photographer Annie Leibovitz for an environmental-protection campaign, is scheduled to make his public debut at the zoo later this week or early next week, according to Schuele.
Until then, Germans can follow the bear's progress in a vast photo spread and videos of Knut drinking from his bottle, bathing and playing with teddy bears and soccer balls, all available on the zoo's Web site.
I could NOT beleive this when i read it,,kill the cub??Just when Al gore and everyone is is saying that the polar bear population is decreasing,,,this guy wants to kill another one.But i guess he thinks its better to let it starve to death in teh wild than be raised to a long life in a zoo by those evil humans who dont know any better,lol.But i guess its good to put out stories like this,for one to show how wacko some on the left can be(and some on the right too),and can you imagine the public backlash that will come from this guy saying it???I bet donations to the polar bear program at that zoo goes threw the roof now,lol. | |
|
| |
| The zoo must kill the bear.
Posted: 3/21/2007 4:27:44 PM | | well my daughter feel in love with it when she saw the pics,,its on foxnews.com...they have lots of pics on there of the little guy...and Yes they are letting him live. | |
|
| The zoo must kill the bear.
Posted: 3/21/2007 4:33:16 PM | | just added a few pics to my profile,,,hopefully they wont delete them...and just finally got on the berlin zoo website after trying ALL day,lol | |
|
VIP25
|
Joined: 12/12/2006
Msg: 5 | |
| The zoo must kill the bear.
Posted: 3/21/2007 4:38:45 PM | | I couldn't believe it myself. Humans wouldn't kill a baby abandoned by its mother, so why a polar bear. Especially with the threat of extinction. It only makes sense to breed them in captivity. Those Germans are all NUTS... | |
|
| The zoo must kill the bear.
Posted: 3/21/2007 4:57:26 PM | | Polar bears are cute, until the first time you see one swat a 300lb seal with one of its paws and rip it to shreds on an ice floe. Theyare wild animals and are better off left in that enviroment. Where this guy was born in a zoo,I have no problem with the zoo hand rearing it, it deserves a chance to live. | |
|
| The zoo must kill the bear.
Posted: 3/21/2007 4:59:12 PM | Hello>>>> Its a zoo baby. Its not a born in the wild and abandoned bear! that makes all the difference. this demonstates how goofy the animal rights activists get. they are all over the map. No wonder people won't ever take most of them serious. They just can't get their priorities or campaigns figured out!???? sheesh.
Of course, the Zoo should try and raise the bear as future stock for other zoos. duh. There is always the debate that No animals should be kept in captivity... but we all know, that is never going to happen. Zoos are the best chance of maintaining species that we might have in the end..on this planet. Chalk up another one for the goof balls. The animal rights activists who change their stance from one week to the next!!! | |
|
| The zoo must kill the bear.
Posted: 3/21/2007 5:06:13 PM | I have fallen in love with Knut too.....from the first picture when he was playing with fingers.....
Nothing in this world remains static; we adapt to the changing environment. Dogs and cats were not domesticated initially......I'm not saying we should make the worlds animals pets, but letting an animal starve because its mother abandoned it is useless and cruel. Knut will not be as acclimated to the social environment than if he were raised by his mother, but perhaps he will adapt to living life in captivity a little better for this....... | |
|
| The zoo must kill the bear.
Posted: 3/21/2007 7:54:34 PM | I was once active in animal rights and still believe in a lot of things they stand for. However, there are always those ''way out there'' in their views. I also volunteered at our local zoo for a few years. I loved working with the animals. These animals are born and raised in zoos and know nothing of the wild. They could never survive on their own, at least not without years of rehabilitating them to the wild. To kill this bear would be inhumane and not necessary.
I think this animal activist should spend more time on the fact that ''surplus'' zoo animals are sold to hunting ranches were hunters pay big bucks to shoot these semi domesticated animals. Now that is something to get ''hot'' about.
But not saving an animal. Many zoo animals are rejected by their mothers and are hand reared. It's not the ideal situation but sometimes it has to happen. | |
|
| |
| The zoo must kill the bear.
Posted: 3/21/2007 9:02:56 PM | Let me tellyou what I think of the "animal activists"-- when we lived in Florida, this person from GREEN PEACE came to the door wanting a donation. I told her no, because at the time Green Peace was using violent tactics to stop the harvest of the baby seals. She immediately said "You're for the killing of helpless baby seals!?!" I said "I disagree with our violent tactics" I thought the woman was going to attack me.
Lately in Arkansas there has been a law passed that horses can no longer be slaughtered for food. So, with the price of horses driven to the bottom, people are letting them slowly starve to death instead of humanely putting them down and harvesting the meat for both human food and animal food. A big round bale of hay due to the shortage of hay last year costs up to $115 in Texas, here in Arkansas someone offered me $40 for 2 yr old hay that when it was new I paid $20 for, a bale of hay only 1 yr old goes for $60+. Trust me, I love animals, I have horses, donkeys and used to raise cattle for natural beef, still have a few heifers to provide meat for our family, and believe me they lilve the live of "Riley" here, and when they go to slaugher I actually go with them so they won't be scared. It just pains me to drive down the road and see old horses lined up pawing at what is left of a bale of hay with their ribs showing. More and more horses are being taken in by rescue groups since this law, intended to "help" the animals has actually harmed them.
I can't imagine why any "animal rights" group would throw a fit about a zoo bear not being "raised in nature"---it wasn't born in nature, so wht's the big deal. I spent a good portion of my young adulthood as a wild life photographer in Africa and South America. I worked with people in the 1960s who are now world famous conservationists and Dr. Ian Player is a personal friend of mine, he is 80 now but still hale and hearty and working to continue to help both humans and animals live together or separately as the case may be. He is responsible for saving the white and black rhinos.
I don't believe in people keeping wild animals as pets, and while zoos may not be ideal places for animals to live, they are better than extinction, and the animals born there don't know the difference. I dont' think people should live in cities either, but the folks born there don't seem to know there is any other way to live. 
Before anyone starts screaming about "animal or human rights" or anything else, they need to get their heads screwed on straight and look at the consequences. Some groups of people shouldn't be allowed to reproduce.  | |
|
| |
| I have never like zoo's
Posted: 3/23/2007 3:31:09 PM | | ^^^ animals should be alowed to roam free...tell that to the dog catchers... | |
|
| I have never like zoo's
Posted: 3/23/2007 4:07:21 PM | plp--does that include ALL animals or just "wild" animals? Yes, "wild and free" is better than caged in a zoo, BUT having said that, zoos are making every effort now to give animals in zoos as natural a habitat as they can. This has several good things, one the animals are stimulated and happier, as evidenced by the fact that they usually are breeding better in captivity. The animals in zoos are now being studied and many of them will go the way of the dinasour if they are not captive bred, which I think would be a shame.
Having worked as a wild life photographer and being personally acquainted with many of the now world famous conservationists and having seen first hand the efforts being made in "nature" and in "zoos" to preserve the various species of wild animals, I can tell you from first hand experience, unless we remove all the humans from the world, some animals (and some species) are not better off roaming "free" and starving or dying of diseases. In a perfect world that might not be so, but our world isn't perfect.
Peace. | |
|
| zoos have their purpose
Posted: 3/23/2007 4:55:35 PM | | I remember when all the radicals were protesting because of the whales in captivity in Victoria.....I think if they go catch a whale, it's wrong, but if they take a whale to help save it's life for some reason, like it has beached itself...whatever...it is better than sitting back doing nothing...PLUS, when you see an animal in captivity, it makes people more aware of them, their needs, and how fragile their existance can be...it's an educational thing. | |
|
| wild animals belong in the wild
Posted: 3/23/2007 5:19:36 PM | | Wild animals belong in the wild. What we humans need to do is stay out of their way to the extent possible. We need to stop polluting the waters, the air, and the land. If we want to study them, we can study them in the wild. If we respect them where they are, we won't have to concern ourselves with endangered species, and habitat depletion. | |
|
| wild animals belong in the wild
Posted: 3/23/2007 5:32:24 PM | Unfortunately, Tom, sometimes there isn't a way we can "stay out of the way" of animals in africa and other places, when PEOPLE are starving because they have no land, they will take the animal's lands--there are ways to make good "use" of wild life in Africa and I have been there when this was being worked through--sometimes there is no good way to have "ideal" for people and "ideal" for animals. I can't blame a starving person for killing an endangered species to survive himself. In the long term from our point of view, it may be bad, but "long term" when you are watching your children starve is TODAY. Read Ian Player's books--he is a friend of mine and one of the elder statesmen of conservation in Africa--and gentleman and a scholar. He is responsible for the saving of the white and black rhino. I was there during that time, so can speak from experiences as well as "theory."
Lots of "theory" sounds good on paper, Karl Marx sounded great on paper, but it didn't "work" in the real world. The real world is what we have to deal with, unfortunately.
I see no reason to kill that bear cub--his genetics need to be preserved. | |
|
| wild animals belong in the wild
Posted: 3/23/2007 9:31:40 PM | | this is a case of these activists sticking their heads up their a***s. He was born in captivity, therefore, whatever would happen in the wild does not apply. Animal rights people are supposed to be for the rights of animals to live and be treated well, now zoos are not the best things in the world, but he was born in one. Im all for animal activism but this time, they are not thinking. | |
|
grog27
|
Joined: 2/25/2005
Msg: 19 | |
| I have never like zoo's
Posted: 3/23/2007 9:55:54 PM | " 'Animals should be allowed to roam free.'
'^^^ ...tell that to the dog catchers...' "
...and all the mink that the "animal rights" people so generously set free. The same mink which then starve in the wild because they've lived all their lives in captivity and never learned how to hunt.
Thanks a lot! | |
|
| wild animals belong in the wild
Posted: 3/23/2007 10:02:56 PM | I agree it is extremely hypocritical for an "animal rights activist" to want the cub killed. And stupid, can they hear themselves?
I agree animals should be left in the wild, and viewed there.....
A tourist once asked the Banff National Parks Board officer what time the bears will be out for a photo op. ;0
Although my dream vacation would be to go on an African Safari...I have not made it there yet. But, I have been to a zoo to see live tigers, lions, etc etc. and been awe struck by there majestic beauty.
In my opinion, I think a zoo is the right place for people to go see these animals in order to learn respect for them. I'm sure a large part of the population will never get the opportunity to see them in there natural habitat. So, I think the zoo can help educate people. I 'm hoping the zoos are only taking in animals that have been abondoned, or have already been raised in captivity. But really not sure.
now....the circus is a whole different story..grrrr.....another post maybe
 | |
|
e-wok
|
Joined: 9/25/2006
Msg: 21 | |
| The zoo must kill the bear.
Posted: 3/25/2007 11:58:55 PM | Mexico City has a Polar Bear in captivity in it's zoo.......poor **stard
looks super depressed in it's glass enclosure. For an animal that
calls thousands of square miles as it's territory, it's no wonder
he looks sad...that enclosure is insanely small - the zoo refuses
to spend add'l funds for making space for this bear.
It's cute now, but what size and kind of enclosure will this bear
get eventually when he becomes full sized? I hope nothing like
MC. | |
|
| The zoo must kill the bear.
Posted: 3/26/2007 1:08:37 AM | What a bunch of freaks... it is a cute polar bear.. it will be cute until it is about ten months old, around four hundred pounds... and gee, I wonder if any other zoo in the world might have a polar bear that was raised at first by humans. To kill a perfectly healthy animal because in the "wild" it would die... is so closed minded, and they should be ashamed to call themselves animal activists, they are way off in my opinion on this one. As a former wildlife rehabilitator, I often saved orphanned and injured wildlife. The only reason to put an animal down is if it is suffering and there is no hope for a full recovery. Besides, it is not like they are going to release the animal... in the wild, they are all starving to death.
It seems there is always someone that will take the other side just to argue...
strange...
If a human decided that they didnt want the baby after all, should they put the baby down? I am pro animals more than I am pro human... the animals are more honest..'except for some fish... lol | |
|
| The zoo must kill the bear.
Posted: 3/26/2007 7:49:03 AM | All mammals have some sort of social structure. Even domestic animals. Any mammal which is hand fed from birth by humans will not have a "normal" set of social adapatation to its peers. Doesn't make any difference if it is a dog, a cat, or a cow, horse, etc.
I have hand raised both exotic animals and domestic animals and I have never seen one that was 100% "well adjusted" like a wild animal would have been, nor even a cow.
I noticed the social maladaption to a Scottish Highland orphan calf I bottle raised. It was kept separated from the other animals because of infection, so it was 6 months old before it was put in with the herd and to this day, she keeps her self separate from the other cattle, rather than mingles in the herd because she doesn't consider herself a "cow"--though she does breed and rear her calf normally, when she had her first calf, she was confused and upset and deserted it and required human intervention to make her bond with that calf. Since she was gentle and we happened to be present we held her nose to it and eventually instinct took over and she started to lick it. Subsequent calves have been no problem.
All mammals have both "instinct" and "learning" in how they interact with their species in terms of many things. Some things are time-critical such as wolf pups bonding with their pack at between 12 and 16 weeks of age. If that time table is violated, they will never properly "bond"--- The sex of the mammal also effects how an animal that is hand raised will respond later. A male llama will become violent to humans so must be castrated if it is hand raised. Few horses of either sex adapt and can be somewhat dangerous because they don't have the "respect" for humans that keep them from "playing" with the humans that they consider peers--and a horse plays with other horses by kicking and biting. Okay between horses but not horses and humans.
A female bovine (cow) does fine if not confined away from other calves, but a male bovine (bull) will almost always become dangerous to humans unless it is castrated. It h as no "respect" for humans as "superior" and tries to rise up in the pecking order as it reaches sexuall maturity.
I am not sure what the effects of hand raising the bear cub will have on its personality and social interaction with other bears, and my guess is that it would be more dangerous to humans than one mama-raised, but since humans will be doing very little interactions with ANY zoo polar bear I don't think that would make much difference.
Having interacted with many captive large cats, and other large mammals, I am totally against people keeping them for PETS, and just like the big Tiger ate Roy, they ARE WILD ANIMALS, they are not domestic animals, they do not "love" their owners, and they are socially maladapted, but they are WILD even if "tame"--
In the world today, the increasingly good zoos are probably the only hope for some species of animals to survive. While "roaming free" may be a nice theory in concept, in reality it is a death sentence for the species for some. | |
|
| The zoo must kill the bear.
Posted: 3/26/2007 8:40:23 AM | A correction of mis-information. Roy Horn was NOT EATEN and is quite alive, thankyouverymuch.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siegfried_&_Roy
Now, an abandoned cub can't be given to another female to raise. The natural habitat of these bears is eroding due to climate change. Modern zoos have banded together to share their animals to preserve endangered and nearly extinct species, by increasing the gene pool for breeding and captive specimen numbers.
At some point, the gene pool becomes too small to sustain even captive numbers, and the species quietly goes extinct as the last specimens disappear.
I'm not sure what the fuss is, in this thread. Its seems a bit inane to post it as an 'public outrage statement', when the zoo had no intent of euthanizing this bear. The question was how to go about hand raising him so that he survived as an important contribution to the breeding male population, yet maintained some semblance of normal behavior later on as a captive adult.
He HAD to be hand-reared; these mammals will be neurologically damaged by a lack of physical contact - use of soft (stuffed animal) surrogates has not been very successful in the past. | |
|
| The zoo must kill the bear.
Posted: 3/26/2007 12:32:14 PM | I realize Roy lived over his attack and he was not completely "eaten" to be more precise, but if being bitten to the extent that he was by a captive tiger isn't being "eaten" in a generic sense, then I apologize for being so graphic and hyperbolic.
My point was only that no matter how "tame" or "trained" a captive hunting animal is, they are still "Wild" animals and killing is instinctive with them, not just hunting for food. Most hunters won't kill if they are not hungry, but some kill for "sport." Where I live we h ave some of the best fed coyote packs in the world because of the chicken farms, and the coyotes are fat, health, and never have to kill for food, but if I didn't have a guardian dog on my farm, I wouldn't have a cat or small dog or a calf survive. Even dogs which have been domesticated for centuries still attack humans on a fairly regular basis. Even the "non aggressive" breeds will make attacks on people that "seem unprovoked."
When I was doing wild life photography in South Africa and South America in the 60s I was exposed to many types of captive wild animals. Many under "good" conditions, but the majority under horrible, cruel, awful circumstances. One of the women I was working with at that time was attacked by an adult jaguar she had hand raised from a cub. It mauled her horribly, and five minutes later was licking the blood off her face and arms. The animal eventually wound up on the Monroe, Louisiana, zoo. This woman was a professional animal handler, so it wasn't just a case of someone who knew nothing about wild animals and was keeping it as a "pet." She just relaxed her guard for one second at the wrong time.
The USDA has finally drafted and is starting in the past few years to enforce rules about the transportation, sale, and care of exotic animals, unfortunately those rules do not cover all situations. They also cover domestic animals that are used for "educational" purposes, circus animals, etc. as well as canine breeding farms, but only if they sell to pet stores. The SPCA and other groups also help to protect animals both domestic and exotic, but unfortunately, animals in this country can have horrible lives and still be "legally" cared for.
Just like the "abortion issue" there are people on each side of the "debate" that are rabid about having their interpretation of the "truth" and the "only answer" rule for everyone, there are people on the "animal rights" issue that in my opinion "throw the baby out with the bathwater" by wanting no animal domesticated or used in any way for food, or labor. Cattle roam free in India eating food that people need. I personally think this is a poor choice of resources, but then again, my beliefs are not the same as the Indians, and those people and I will never agree about those cattle. Until recently, I raised cattle and sold "natural grass-fed beef" and I did my best to keep the cattle healthy and happy until their life was ended. As long as they lived, I treated them with respect like I would with any living thing, and tried to see that they had as stress-free a life as they could have. Sometimes, like the calf I had to hand raise separately and she didn't socialize well with other cattle after that, life isn't perfect. That little bear cub's life won't be perfect, but I would think it would be preferable to it's death, even though some people won't agree with me. | |
|
|
|
Home
login 
